Il g-2 del muone nel Modello Standard Massimo Passera Università and INFN Padova Incontri di Fisica delle Alte Energie Pavia, 19-21 Aprile 2006.

Il g-2 del muone nel Modello Standard

Massimo Passera

Università and INFN Padova

Incontri di Fisica delle Alte EnergiePavia, 19-21 Aprile 2006

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 2

0.5 parts per million !!

a= 116592080 (63) £ 10-

11E821 – Final Report: hep-ex/0602035

The current world average value:

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 3

E821 Homepage

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 4

aEXP = (116592080 § 54stat § 33sys) £ 10-11

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 5

The Anomalous Magnetic Moment: Theory

QFT predicts deviations from the Dirac value:

The Dirac theory predicts for the muon:

Study the photon – lepton vertex:

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 6

aQED = (1/2)(/) Schwinger 1948

+ 0.765857410 (27) (/)2

Sommerfield, Petermann, Suura, Wichmann, Elend, MP ’04

+ 24.05050964 (43) (/)3

Barbieri, Laporta, Remiddi, … , Czarnecki, Skrzypek, MP ’04

+ 130.992 (8) (/)4

Kinoshita & Lindquist ’81, … , Kinoshita & Nio July ’05

+ 663 (20) (/)5 In progress

Kinoshita et al. ‘90, Yelkhovsky, Milstein, Kataev, Starshenko,

Broadhurst, Karshenboim, Laporta, Ellis et al.,…, Kataev ’05, Kinoshita & Nio, March

’06.

aQED = 116584718.6 (0.1) (0.4) x 10-11

using

= 1/137.03599911 (46) [3.3 ppb] PDG’04

Adding up, I get:

The QED Contribution to a

…

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 7

aeth = + (1/2)(/) - 0.328 478 444 002 90(60) (/)2

Schwinger 1948 Sommerfield, Petermann ’57, Suura, Wichmann ’57, Elend ’66, MP ’05

+ 1.181 234 016 827 (19) (/)3

Barbieri, Laporta, Remiddi, … , Czarnecki, Skrzypek, MP ’05

- 1.7283 (35) (/)4

Kinoshita & Lindquist ’81, … , Kinoshita & Nio July ’05

+ 0.0 (3.8) (/)5 In progress (12672 mass-indep. diagrams!) Mohr & Taylor ’05 (CODATA 2002); Kinoshita & Nio, in progress.

+ 1.671 (19) x 10-12 Hadronic Mohr & Taylor ’05 (CODATA 2002), Davier & Hoecker ’98, Krause ’97, Knecht ’03

+ 0.0297 (5) x 10-12 Electroweak Mohr & Taylor ’05 (CODATA 2002)

[ The Electron g-2 and (the best determination of) Alpha ]

Comparing aeth() with ae

exp = 1159652188.3(4.2) x 10-12

one gets:

CODATA ’98 based on Van Dyck et al. 1987

= 137.035 998 83 (50) [3.6 ppb] Kinoshita & Nio ’05

versus= 137.036 000 10 (110) [7.7 ppb] Wicht et al. 2002

= 137.035 999 11 (46) [3.3 ppb] CODATA ’02 = PDG ’04

Check of QED at 4 loop level !

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 8

Back to a: The Electroweak Contribution

One-Loop Term:

1972: Jackiv, Weinberg; Bars, Yoshimura; Altarelli, Cabibbo, Maiani; Bardeen, Gastmans, Lautrup; Fujikawa Lee, Sanda.

One-Loop plus Higher-Order Terms:

a

EW = 154 (2) (1) x 10-

11

Higgs mass, M_top error, three-loop nonleading logs

Hadronic loop uncertainties:

Kukhto et al. ’92, Czarnecki, Krause, Marciano ’95; Knecht, Peris, Perrottet, de Rafael ’02; Czarnecki, Marciano & Vainshtein ’02; Degrassi & Giudice ’98; Heinemeyer, Stockinger & Weiglein ’04Gribouk & Czarnecki ’05.

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 9

Hadronic contributions - I

Dec ’01

Aug ’03

Hagiwara et al., PRD 69 (2004) 093003

Bouchiat & Michel 1961, Gourdin & de Rafael 1969

S. Eidelman, INFN Roadmap Meeting, LNF, Jan 2006

2 2

< 2 GeV

< 2 GeV

2-5 GeV 2-5 GeV

> 5 GeV > 5 GeV

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 10

Hadronic contributions - II

aHLO = 6934 (53)exp (35)rad x 10-11 A. Hoecker@ICHEP04,

hep-ph/0410081

= 6948 (86) x 10-11 F. Jegerlehner, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 126 (2004) 325

= 6924 (59)exp (24)rad x 10-11 K. Hagivara et al., PRD69 (2004)

093003

= 6944 (48)exp (10)rad x 10-11 de Troconiz, Yndurain, PRD71 (2005)

073008

• Radiative Corrections (Luminosity, ISR, Vacuum Polarization, FSR) are a very delicate issue! All under control?

• CMD2’s new (1998) data presented at EPS 2005 and at Novosibirsk 2006 agree well with their earlier (1995) ones.

• SND’s data released in June 2005 have been recently reanalyzed (RC fixed, decreased – see Achasov’s talk at Novosibirsk 2006). There is now good agreement with the data of CMD2.

Data from e+ e- (CMD2 after August 2003)

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 11

Hadronic contributions - III

• Radiative Return (KLOE & BABAR): The collider operates at fixed energy but scan vary continuously This is animportant independent method! (See Nguyen’s talk.)

• Some discrepancies between KLOE’s and CMD2’s results, although their contributions to a

HLO are similar.

• SND’s JETP101 (2005) 1053 data were significantly higher than KLOE’s ones above the peak, but they now decreased.

• Comparison in the range s2 [0.37, 0.93] GeV2:

a = (3786 § 27stat § 23sys+th) £ 10-11 CMD2 (95) PLB578 (2004) 285

a = (3770 § 22stat § 15sys+th) £ 10-11 CMD2 (95+98) Eidelman 2006

prelim.

a = (3756 § 8stat § 48sys+th) £ 10-11 KLOE

Venanzoni@ICHEP’04

a = (3767 § 13stat § 49sys+th) £ 10-11 SND new Eidelman 2006

prelim.

a= (3856 § 14stat § 50sys+th) £ 10-11 SND old JETP 101

(2005)1053

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 12

Hadronic contributions - IV

Tau Data (ALEPH, CLEO, OPAL and BELLE)• The tau data of ALEPH and CLEO are significantly higher than CMD2 e+e- ones above» 0.85 GeV. KLOE confirms this discrepancy with the tau data (see plot in a moment).

• In the same region, SND [no longer] agrees with ALEPH.

• The recent preliminary tau results of BELLE seem to be in better agreement with e+e- data (see plot in a moment).

• Latest value (Davier, Eidelman, Hoecker & Zhang, EPJC31 (2003) 503):

aHLO= 7110 (58) x

10-11 • Inconsistencies in the e+e- or tau data? Are all possible isospin-breaking effects properly taken into account?? (Marciano & Sirlin 1988; Cirigliano, Ecker, Neufeld 2001-02, …)

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 13

Hadronic contributions - V

Davier, Hoecker & Zhang, hep-ph/0507078

superseded

1995

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 14

Hadronic contributions - VI

MM22 (GeV (GeV22))

G. Venanzoni, INFN Roadmap WG, LNF, Jan-06 BELLE hep-ex/0512071

(superseded)(1995)

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 15

Higher-order Hadronic contributions

Vacuum Polarization

Light-by-Light

aHHO(vp) = -98 (1) x 10-

11

aHHO(lbl) = + 80 (40) x 10-11 Knecht & Nyffeler

2002

aHHO(lbl) = +136 (25) x 10-11 Melnikov & Vainshtein

2003

O contribution of diagrams containinghadronic vacuum polarization insertions:

The contribution of the O hadronic light-by-light diagram had a troubled life. The latest vales are:

Krause ’96, Alemany et al. ’98, Hagivara et al. ’03

Hayakawa, Kinoshita 2001; Bijnens, Pallante, Prades 2001; Knecht, Nyffeler 2001, …

This term may become the ultimate limitation of the Standard Model prediction.

Shifts by » -3 £ 10-11 if tau data are used instead of the e+e- ones. Davier & Marciano ’04

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 16

Standard Model vs. Experiment

Adding up all the above contribution we get the following SM predictions for a and comparisons with the measured value:

aHHO(lbl) = 136 (25) x

10-11

[1] A. Hoecker@ICHEP04, hep-ph/0410081.[2] F. Jegerlehner, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 126 (2004) 325.[3] Hagivara, Martin, Nomura & Teubner, PRD69 (2004) 093003.[4] J.F. de Troconiz and F.J. Yndurain, PRD71 (2005) 073008.[5] Davier, Eidelman, Hoecker and Zhang, EPJC31 (2003) 503.

aHHO(lbl) = 80 (40) x 10-11 in all table except angle

brackets.

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 17

Conclusions

The discrepancies (Exp-SM) range from 2.0 to 3.1 according to the values chosen for the hadronic contributions, if e+e- data are used (recent CMD2 and SND results are not yet included).

With tau data, (Exp-SM) » 1 only! The e+e- vs taupuzzle is still unsolved. Unaccounted isospin viol. corrections? Problems in the e+e- or data? Recent news: SND no longer agrees with Aleph; Preliminary Belle’s data seem to be in better agreement with e+e-. More work and data needed from KLOE, Babar, Belle...

Future: QED and EW sectors ready for the E969 challenge! The Hadronic sector needs more work and future experimental results: VEPP-2000 (DAFNE-2?). An improvement by a factor of 2 is challenging but possible! The effort is certainly worth the opportunity to unveil (or just constrain) “New Physics” effects!

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 18

The future?

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 19

The End

M. Passera - IFAE 2006 20

The Hadronic Contribution to (MZ2)

The effective fine-structure constant at the scale s is given by:

The light quarks part is determined by:

Progress due to significant improvementof the data (mostly CMD-2 and BES):

had(5) (Mz

2) =

0.02800 (70) Eidelman, Jegerlehner’95

0.02761 (36) Burkhardt, Pietrzyk 2001

0.02755 (23) Hagivara et al., 2004

0.02758 (35) Burkhardt, Pietrzyk 6-05Hagivara et al., PRD69 (2004) 093003